Something to have printed?

[Blue_In_AK]

What do you guys think of this one? Is this print- and/or gift-worthy? Visualize it with a nice mat and frame.

[regnaD kciN]

1. I would think so...

It's interesting, because most of the photo has a soft, painterly look, then you have the one foreground plant giving it definition and contrast.

[ET Awful]

2. I like it. I'd be tempted to try cropping it in different ways to see how

it looks (i.e. remove much of the blue sky which will give it more of a winter sunset feel), I like it as is, but I'd be tempted to experiment too.

[lakemonster11]

3. I think it would make a nice Christmas card.

I used a picture I took to make Christmas cards a couple of years ago (I think I used cafepress) and they were a big hit.

[Blue_In_AK]

4. Well, I guess I'm out of luck

because with the resolution that I had the camera set to, the guy at the photo place said I could only get a good print up to about 5X7 --what I was looking for was more like an 11X14.

BUT the Canon came last night, so I probably still have time to get out and take some good shots and get one printed, matted and framed before Christmas if I don't waste any more time. So, those of you who know, that means I would set the "quality" on the menu at the top "L," right, for large? Please don't talk to me about RAW yet because I don't have time to learn all of that.

Any other tips for making sure that I have a print-quality large photograph?

[lakemonster11]

5. Make sure you have the ISO set as low as you can.

High ISOs tend to create noise.

I'm always making that mistake. I'll be shooting somewhere dark and have to crank my camera up to ISO 1600 just to get a non-blurry shot and then I'll forget to change it back the next day when I'm shooting out in the bright sunlight! When I load my pictures on the computer, the shadows are full of noise. :eyes:

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

6. Also use a tripod, it is amazing how much

camera movement we are not even aware of.

[RagingInMiami]

8. RAW is very good once you learn it

Especially for enlargements. And it's really not hard to learn it. All it really is is just an extra step in the processing procedure, but it allows you to adjust the temperature of the photo as well as the exposure and brightness.

But if you don't want to go there yet, set it to "large".

Are you using Photoshop?

[Blue_In_AK]

9. PaintShop, but it's basically the same, I think.

I got PhotoShop elements with the new camera so I'll probably load that onto my computer, too, since I have plenty of room.

I went out this afternoon just at sunset and took a few shots with the 10-20 mm and they are beautiful, although somewhat darker than I expected. Is that because of the size of the lens? Do I need to manually adjust the aperture? I was shooting in automatic mode since I'm just learning the camera. Even though they're somewhat underexposed, the pictures are so much more clearer than the Mavica -- I'm really happy with this new camera. I love my lenses.

[RagingInMiami]

10. Did it come with PS Elements 3 or 2?

I usually shoot in either Picture, Aperture or Speed priority mode depending on the situation. You have to take all kinds of things into consideration, including the IPO. If it's too dark, maybe you had it set on 100 IPO and you need to change it to 200 IPO or 400 IPO. Then there is also the meter mode, evaluative, partial and spot which can make a difference.

You also have to make sure you're not accidentally underexposing the shot.

[regnaD kciN]

12. 3 or 2? PSE is up to 4 already!

I believe version 4 has the same Camera RAW controls as CS2, so it would be a good tool for that format.

[RagingInMiami]

15. Well blow me down

I just went from PSE 3 to CS2, but the reason I ask is because when I bought my 10D in July of last year, it came with PSE 2 even though PSE 3 was already out. I had to buy PSE 3.

But if the 20D came with PSE 4, that's great. CS2 is really good cause it has Adobe Bridge, but what I don't like about it is that it doesn't have Adobe Downloader, which automatically downloads the photos from your memory card.

You would think with all the hype CS2 comes with, they would have at least included that one function.

[Blue_In_AK]

14. I think I had it on 100

so I guess that would explain it.

[RagingInMiami]

16. Well, Blue

You have until the end of this week to perfect your camera and PS technique because by next week, I'll be quizing you on the techniques of RAW, levels, curves, variations, color balance, etc.

[Blue_In_AK]

17. You're joking, right??

I'm reading the manuals as fast as I can, but, sad to say, I don't have a photographic memory, and some of that stuff I'm reading, I'm like ------- "H-U-H?" For the moment I'm just trying to figure out how the Canon's buttons and dials correlate with the ones on the Mavica. That will at least get me started. But it's sure got more bells and whistles, and now I have to learn all this technical stuff -- but it's all good. It'll be fun, and I know you all will patiently tutor me along.

[RagingInMiami]

18. Of course I'm joking

I'm still learning myself. You're just going to have to have patience.

[Blue_In_AK]

19. It's 2...

Will it still do what it needs to do or do I need to upgrade?

[RagingInMiami]

20. It will teach you the basics but you probably want to upgrade

Best thing to do is buy books on www.amazon.com on how to learn PS. And always read the reviews on the books which are very helpful because there are so many books out there.

[ConsAreLiars]

11. Exposure metering on film and digital cameras is designed

to let in the right amount of light to properly expose an "average" subject. This is generally very useful. The light meters will tell you the settings (or just set the camera for you) so that the subject is neither "too dark" nor "too light."

But with non-average subjects, when a lot of what you are shooting is very dark or very bright, the meter will still tell you (or the camera) what settings will make that that subject appear to be of "average" brightness.

There are several ways around this, but the one I find easiest to use on my film camera is the "exposure compensation" adjustment. Basically, light-colored subjects need to be exposed a bit more than the camera meter might recommend, if they are to appear light, and darker subjects a bit less. It is probably calibrated in "stops," and one stop difference just means doubling or halving the light reaching the film (or sensor), and, with film at least, setting exposure compensation to plus one-stop would probably give results closer to what you expected.

The other tool, unique to digital, is the histogram, which displays the amounts of your image that are of varying degrees of brightness (from solid black to pure white and in between). By using it you can see if the range of brightnesses being recorded corresponds to what you are seeing, and adjust accordingly.

(edit to add that you can probably "fix" the underexposure fairly easily with Paint Shop or Elements, although I've only used those programs briefly.)

[lakemonster11]

25. An example of a non-average subject (snow) shot in RAW

Here's the shot as it would have appeared if I had shot it in JPEG:




Here is the same shot after I increased the exposure by 2 stops (the correct amount for an all-white subject) in the Photoshop RAW Editor. (I also adjusted the white balance):

[Blue_In_AK]

26. Oh, that's cool...

I did some snow shots today, too, but I shot them regular and then lightened them up just a little in PaintShop. I can see I'm going to have to learn this RAW thing.

[lakemonster11]

27. It's really not that hard (I promise!)

And it's way easier to post-process your pictures when you can make all the right decisions from the beginning instead of having to "rescue" them once your camera has made a mess of them.

I first started using RAW because I was having trouble with getting realistic color in my pictures. Once I switched over to RAW, I quickly figured out that this was a white balance issue. My camera was trying to read the light as "daylight," "florescent," "shadow," etc., but it wasn't always doing the best job.

In the RAW editor, you can adjust the light temperature yourself---and it doesn't have to be any of the preset conditions, either. You can just slide the adjustment bar along until the preview looks right. As soon as I figured out how to shoot in RAW, I was immediately happy with the color in my photographs. It was great!

[Blue_In_AK]

28. LakeMonster, I just looked at your home page...

I've got some old 50+ year old photos that my dad took and developed that I would love for you to see. I just need to get them scanned and posted on here. I think you'd really like them.

[lakemonster11]

29. Yeah, I'd love to see them!

:)

[regnaD kciN]

13. Shoot in RAW, and...

...you'll have a lot more latitude for post-processing to different brightness levels.

[Immad2]

7. Beautiful - great picture - it would be wonderful as a gift!

[bvar22]

21. WooHoo.

HAPPY NEW CAMERA DAY!!!!:party:

I am a couple of days away from ordering a new camera, and it will probably be a 20D.
Please blog all your 1st impressions.

[Blue_In_AK]

22. I'm dying to get out and take some more shots

since I underexposed the ones I took yesterday, but today it was foggy all day long, so I don't have much to work with except a bunch of frosty trees. Hopefully tomorrow....

So far, though, I've been really pleased even though the pictures all look like twilight instead of sunset. Definitely operator error.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

23. I like it. Just from this resolution I could do this...

But I had to futz some more and got...



which did not float my boat, so... this one I think is best...



but, that's just me.


Hope you don't mind.

BTW, what is the original res of the photo? I think you need to find another place to develop pics if they don't want to make enlargements. Believe it or not, people who make enlargements know just as little about digital as the average moron on the street.

[Blue_In_AK]

24. The original size on the photo is 1280 X 960, 190 KB

so it really is kind of small. I'd just never thought about printing any of these when I took them, so I had the resolution set low on the camera. The new shots I've taken with the Canon are much, much bigger ... now I just need some workable weather to get another something I like so I can get this little project done before Christmas. My daughter told me all she wanted for Christmas from me was one of my Alaska photographs blown up, matted and framed for her to put on her wall so she doesn't feel so homesick down there in L.A., so I want to get something really special.

I like what you did with the other photo. I think it's a lot of fun to play around like that. I got some software with my new camera called Digital Photo Professional 1.6 that I was messing with this afternoon, so I might take all my dark pictures and do some "extreme processing" on them and see what I can come up with.

[F.Gordon]

30. Definitely

I find it useful to "see" a print matted and framed to get an idea how it will look... using this kind of stuff prior to actually investing in doing a mat/frame......I can definitely "see" this hanging on a wall.
:thumbsup: